Patna High Court
Amit @ Amit Kumar @ HaikalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Amit Kumar, was not named in the FIR relating to a theft of Rs.1,40,000 from a motorcycle dickey, but was implicated after a co‑accused, Raghav Pandey, was arrested based on CCTV footage and allegedly confessed the petitioner's involvement. The petitioner, who has criminal antecedents in eleven cases, sought anticipatory bail, arguing that mere suspicion arising from the co‑accused's confession and his past cases should not preclude bail, citing Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P. (2020) 11 SCC 648. The State opposed the bail. The court examined whether the implication was prima facie sufficient for arrest and held that the suspicion alone, without substantive incriminating material, did not justify denial of bail. Consequently, the court ordered anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the petitioner is implicated solely on the basis of a co‑accused's confession and his criminal antecedents.
- Whether the suspicion arising from the co‑accused's statement constitutes sufficient ground to deny bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- co‑accused confession
- criminal antecedents
- Section 379 IPC
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNSS
- bail
- suspicion
- CCTV evidence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26776 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-313 Year-2018 Thana- NAUGACHIA District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Amit @ Amit Kumar @ Haikal Son of Nityanand Mandal Resident of Village
-Singhiya Makandpur, Harnath Chak, PS -Gopalpur, District- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bharat Lal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The accused-petitioner, not named in the F.I.R., is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Naugachia P.S. Case
No. 313 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per FIR, Rs. 1,40,000/- was stolen from the dickey
of motorcycle of the informant, immediately after its withdrawal
from the bank, when he left his motorcycle for a short period for
purchasing the medicine.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submitted that on the basis of CCTV footage, one suspect
namely, Raghav Pandey was arrested by police, who confessed
the name of this petitioner. It is submitted that without having
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26776 of 2026(2) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
any incriminating material exclusively on the basis of suspicion
arising out of confessional statement of apprehended co-
accused, the petitioner was implicated particularly due to his
criminal antecedents as he found involved in eleven (11) cases
where almost in three cases he has been acquitted and in rest of
eight cases, he is on bail.
5. It is further pointed out that if the merit of the case
appears available in favour of the petitioner, merely due to
criminal antecedents, prayer of bail of the petitioner should not
be rejected. Learned counsel relied upon the legal report of
Hon’ble Supreme Court as available through Prabhakar
Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and Another reported in (2020) 11
SCC 648.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
7. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as implication of petitioner prima facie
appears on the basis of suspicion with present crime in question
arising out of confessional statement of apprehended co-
accused, accordingly, above-named petitioner, in the event of
his arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from this
order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26776 of 2026(2) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate – 1st, Naugachia, Bhagalpur/concerned court
in connection with Naugachia P.S. Case No. 313 of 2018,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…